Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] deprecate git stash save

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:19:38AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > - This option is deprecated in favour of 'git stash push'. > > + This option is deprecated in favour of 'git stash push'. It > > + differs from "stash push" in that it cannot take pathspecs, > > + and any non-option

Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] status: add option to show ignored files differently

Jameson Miller writes: > Jameson Miller (4): > status: add option to show ignored files differently > status: report matching ignored and normal untracked > status: document options to show matching ignored files > status: test --ignored=matching Thanks,

Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] status: add option to show ignored files differently

Jameson Miller writes: > Teach the status command more flexibility in how ignored files are > reported. Currently, the reporting of ignored files and untracked > files are linked. You cannot control how ignored files are reported > independently of how untracked files

Re: Ascertaining amount of "original" code across files/repo

Thomas Adam writes: > What I did was first of all ascertain the number of original lines in each of > the files I was interested in: > > for i in *.[ch] > do > c="$(git --no-pager blame "$i" | grep -c '^\^')" > [ $c -gt 0 ] && echo

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] deprecate git stash save

Overall the result looks reasonable and get us closer to the ideal world where nobody recalls "stash save" has ever existed ;-) Will queue; thanks.

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] deprecate git stash save

Thomas Gummerer writes: > Interdiff below: Thanks. Looks much more polished. > > diff --git a/Documentation/git-stash.txt b/Documentation/git-stash.txt > index 89b6a0e672..8be661007d 100644 > --- a/Documentation/git-stash.txt > +++ b/Documentation/git-stash.txt > @@

Re: Consider escaping special characters like 'less' does

On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 08:27:20AM -0400, Jason Pyeron wrote: > > ESC (for color) > > + if ($line =~ s/[\000-\011\013-\032\034-\037]/?/g) { > > What about CR [0x0D] ? I assumed that CR was one of the things we'd want to avoid (and it was in fact what I used to test this).

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] deprecate git stash save

On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 06:04:06PM +0100, Thomas Gummerer wrote: > Thanks Peff for the review of the previous rounds. > > In addition to addressing the review comments, this round adds another > patch getting rid of the extra help with an unknown option to git > stash push. Yeah, the reasoning

Re: "Cannot fetch git.git" (worktrees at fault? or origin/HEAD) ?

On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 07:54:57PM +0530, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote: > On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 13:45 -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > > > > The git-test from Michael sounds intriguing. Initially I put off using > > it as I had my main working dir (or rather test dir) on a spinning > > disk, still. Now I

Ascertaining amount of "original" code across files/repo

Hi all, I was recently left with an interesting problem of looking at a heuristic to determine how much original code was left in a repository. Or to put another way, how much the code had changed since. In my case "original code" means "since the initial commit", as this code base had been

N/A

Claim Donation

[PATCH v3 2/3] mark git stash push deprecated in the man page

'git stash push' fixes a historical wart in the interface of 'git stash save'. As 'git stash push' has all functionality of 'git stash save', with a nicer, more consistent user interface deprecate 'git stash save'. To do this, remove it from the synopsis of the man page, and move it to a

[PATCH v3 3/3] stash: remove now superfluos help for "stash push"

With the 'git stash save' interface, it was easily possible for users to try to add a message which would start with "-", which 'git stash save' would interpret as a command line argument, and fail. For this case we added some extra help on how to create a stash with a message starting with "-".

[PATCH v3 0/3] deprecate git stash save

Thanks Peff for the review of the previous rounds. In addition to addressing the review comments, this round adds another patch getting rid of the extra help with an unknown option to git stash push. Interdiff below: diff --git a/Documentation/git-stash.txt b/Documentation/git-stash.txt index

[PATCH v3 1/3] replace git stash save with git stash push in the documentation

git stash push is the newer interface for creating a stash. While we are still keeping git stash save around for the time being, it's better to point new users of git stash to the more modern (and more feature rich) interface, instead of teaching them the older version that we might want to phase

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mark git stash push deprecated in the man page

On 10/21, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 07:33:04PM +0100, Thomas Gummerer wrote: > > > 'git stash push' fixes a historical wart in the interface of 'git stash > > save'. As 'git stash push' has all functionality of 'git stash save', > > with a nicer, more consistent user interface

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] replace git stash save with git stash push in the documentation

On 10/21, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 07:33:03PM +0100, Thomas Gummerer wrote: > > > diff --git a/git-stash.sh b/git-stash.sh > > index 8b2ce9afda..16919277ba 100755 > > --- a/git-stash.sh > > +++ b/git-stash.sh > > @@ -267,11 +267,11 @@ push_stash () { > > #

Re: "Cannot fetch git.git" (worktrees at fault? or origin/HEAD) ?

On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 13:45 -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > > The git-test from Michael sounds intriguing. Initially I put off using > it as I had my main working dir (or rather test dir) on a spinning > disk, still. Now I test in memory only, which is a lot faster, so I could > try if git-test can

(no subject)

-- Hello, I am writing you this email to solicit your co-operation and partnership in a business that would benefit us immensely. I would like to name you the beneficiary to my late client's fund who died along with his next-of-kin during a summer vacation in the Middle East. I shall

Re: [RFE] Add minimal universal release management capabilities to GIT

Heads up, I'm gonna play the devil's advocate a little, here. On Sat, 2017-10-21 at 15:56 +0200, nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote: > No that is not up to the hash function. First because hashes are too > long to be manipulated by humans, and second no hash will ever > capture human intent. You

RE: Consider escaping special characters like 'less' does

> -Original Message- > From: Jeff King > Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 6:13 PM > To: Joris Valette > Cc: Andreas Schwab; Jason Pyeron; git@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: Consider escaping special characters like 'less' does > > > I.e., something like this would probably help your case

RE:

Re: Re* Is t5601 flaky for anybody else?

On Tue, 2017-10-17 at 17:08 -0400, Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 06:02:59AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > FWIW, I can't replicate the problem on either "master" or "pu". I wonder > why. > Neither can I. I tried running t5601 on "master" and on "pu" after reverting the patch